December 2008 Archives

The Philadelphia Inquirer's Editorial titled "U.S. R&D Spending: Investing in the future" looks into R & D expenditure in the US and Asian countries. The Editorial believes that "Budgets for R&D should be increased, even in economically uncertain times. U.S. expenditures on R&D will still dwarf those of most other countries in 2009, but Asia as a region spends almost the same amount. South Korea, China and other Asian nations understand the lesson this nation learned decades ago from investing in science."

The editorial from The Philadelphia Inquirer dated Dec 27, 2008 points to the fact that:

The South Korean government said last week that it plans to spend $8.3 billion on research and development next year to bolster next-generation growth industries and eco-friendly technologies.

The author states that "Much of the U.S. decline can be attributed to the worldwide recession, which has made not just governments but ordinary folks cut back on spending. But research leading to industrial, medical or other technological innovations can save money, if not produce more of it.

America considers bailouts of the financial and automotive sectors as investments; it should think of money spent on R&D in the same way.

Sure, there was a time in this country when inventors like Bell and Edison depended only on their own blood, sweat and tears. But successful research since the mid-20th century has largely depended on benefactors with deep pockets - chief among them the U.S. government."

Looking into the implications of Bayh Dole act the piece states that: "Computer designer Bill Buxton noted in a recent Business Week Online column that universities also have shifted to "commercially relevant" science spurred by the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, which allows them to patent and license the results of federally funded research.

The consequences, though, are deals such as the one between Virginia Commonwealth University and Philip Morris, in which the school was contractually prohibited from releasing any research results without the company's permission.

Buxton urged universities and companies to fund their own research. "The real question," he said, "is not, 'Can I afford to invest in research?' It is, 'How can I afford not to?' "That's the question facing the entire nation, not just academia."

To read the entire editorial from The Philadelphia Inquirer click here.

Ting Zhang in the article "Technology Transfer and IP Licensing in China" refers to the Legal and Cultural Differences. The article is published in IPR Bulletin Vol. 40, December 2008, Universidad de Alicante, Spain.

Chinese law does not allow restriction on licensees carrying out enhancement. In addition, licensors have to provide warranties, such as guaranteeing the ownership of the technology, no glitches and that the technological objectives will be achieved as described in the contract. Even if a signed contract is subject to foreign law, when it comes to filing lawsuit in China, the Chinese laws and regulations still apply.

There are also other risks and problems associated with licensing technologies in China. In general, know-how (trade secret) is hard to protect in China, and many IP lawsuit cases involve know-how leak from former employees. While there is the well-known different interpretation of the term "contract" between Western and Chinese businesses, some post-contract risks also exist. For example, disputes usually start when Chinese companies become familiar with the technology licensed. There are problems collecting royalties from the licensees and getting the money remitted out of China. Last but not least, there is a cultural and historic mindset about the value of IP that needs to be kept in mind. However, protection of intellectual property rights is possible through a carefully drafted contract and, more importantly, through effective implementation and ongoing monitoring.

To read the entire article on Technology Transfer and IP Licensing in China click here.

Market Wire on the Wall Street Journal Network reports according to a study on "R&D Ecosystem in India" released by the British High Commission and the Canadian High Commission in India, India will emerge as the next global hub for innovation. The study is conducted by evaluserve.

The report points out that "The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) drafted the Public Funded Research and Development (Protection, Utilisation and Regulation of Intellectual Property) Bill, 2007, an indigenous version of the Bayh-dole Act, to address these issues. The new legislation will emphasise education opportunities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and help R&D institutions and scientists to own the intellectual property they create."

Access the complete report at http://www.evalueserve.com/Media-And-Reports/WhitePapers.aspx.

Market Wire reports the following:

"India targets to increase its R&D spend from less than 1 percent of GDP to 2 percent by 2012 under the 11th Five-Year Plan. The move will catapult India to the league of developed nations that spend 2.5 percent of their GDP on R&D on an average.

The Indian R&D ecosystem comprises various supporting infrastructure, government departments, research organisations, funding institutions and industry associations. The government is focusing on public-private partnerships, such as knowledge parks and incubator programmes, to promote commercialisation, transfer and diffusion of technology.

Angel investors and venture capitalists also have an important role in the commercialisation process, given the limited availability of funding for early stage companies and innovators. Further, venture capitalists are also providing a lot of late-stage funding. The number of private equity/venture capitalist deals in late-stage funding rose from 33 in 2005 to 104 in 2006, while the number of early stage funding deals rose from 19 in 2005 to 59 in 2006.

That India is becoming increasingly conducive to innovation is evident from the fact that the total number of patents filed in the country has increased significantly. The number of patent applications filed grew at a CAGR of 23.3 percent, from 10,592 in 2001-02 to 24,505 in 2005-06. The growth accelerated after India became Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) compliant in 2005."

To read the Press Release on Market Watch click here.

"The East African" in its story Poor world calls on West to share 'clean' technology looks into the issues of global warming, climate change and the role of IP and technology transfer vis-à-vis environment.

Some extracts of the story are reproduced below:

"The G-77 and China also acknowledge the intellectual property rights issues related to research and development and the fact that real cash and brainpower are expended in developing such technology. Because of this, they suggested the setting up of as global Climate Development Fund to compensate the holders of such patents.

"They recognise that the innovator should be paid," said Krishnaswamy Srinivas, a policy adviser with Greenpeace International in an interview with The EastAfrican.

Mr Srinivas said developing countries believe that once patent holders are compensated, the technologies they have developed can be made readily available to developing countries."

The author also refers to the international conferences and moves made in this direction in the following:

"The contribution of technology to a reduction in global warming is recognised in the Kyoto Protocol of 1997, which asks states to co-operate in the development and transfer of such technology.

This plea was strengthened during last year's climate conference in Bali, Indonesia.

The Bali conference came up with what is now known as the Bali Action Plan which asked states to, among other things, make it possible for transfer of technology so that the world can mitigate climate change and adapt to its consequences.

The Plan also calls for the need to remove obstacles to technology transfer and to come up with incentives for developing cleaner technologies and encouraging them to be transferred among states.

But one year down the line, the developed world has shown little enthusiasm about embracing the Bali Action Plan.

In the various sessions at the Poznan conference, delegates from developed countries expressed opposition to the injection of public cash to jump start technological development in the developing world."

To read the entire piece form The EastAfrican click here.

The Indian national daily "The Hindu" reports "Bill for protecting IPR in public funded research in Rajya Sabha" that is the Upper House of the Parliament in India.

The news piece is reproduced below:

A Bill to develop a framework for protection and utilisation of intellectual property created out of public funded research and development was introduced in the Rajya Sabhaon Monday.

The Protection and Utilisation of Public Funded Intellectual Property Bill 2008, introduced by Science and Technology Minister Kapil Sibal, seeks to provide for a funding agreement between the government and the recipient before release of grant for research and development.

Besides seeking to bar public disclosure, publication and exhibition of the public funded intellectual property, the Bill lists duties of the recipient who retains the titles.

Observing that in order to compete in a global environment, it was necessary for India to innovate and promote creativity, the statement of objects and reasons said that the country also needed to protect and utilise the intellectual property created out of public funded research and development.

"The ultimate objective, however, is to ensure access to such innovation by all stakeholders for public good," it said.

The proposed legislation would enhance awareness about intellectual property issues, especially in universities, academic and research institutions, the Bill said.

Such innovations could be utilised for raising financial resources of these establishments, through royalties or income, it added.

To read the story from The Hindu click here.

This post comes from Rosemary Wolson's chapter "Technology Transfer in South African Public Research Institutions" in the IP handbook. Rosemary Wolson is Intellectual Property Manager at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) in Pretoria, South Africa. In her previous position as Intellectual Property Manager at the University of Cape Town (UCT), she participated in establishing UCT Innovation, the division responsible for UCT's technology transfer and research contract management functions. Her experience as an early technology transfer practitioner in a developing country sparked her interest in broader policy issues related to the roles of innovation and intellectual property rights in promoting development; she takes on selected applied-research projects in these areas from time to time. She is also involved in various capacity-building and information-sharing initiatives in South Africa, other countries in Africa, and other parts of the world. She is a member of the International Advisory Committee of Public Interest Intellectual Property Advisors (PIIPA) and sits on the Executive Board of the Southern African Research and Innovation Management Association (SARIMA), a regional network of stakeholders.

This chapter in the IP handbook by Rosemary Wolson provides an analytical overview of current complexities vis-à-vis technology transfer in South Africa. It looks into the situation in South Africa which is very dynamic, undergoing many changes and adjustments as we know from our previous posts on the upcoming Bayh Dole like legislation in SA (click here and here).  This piece provides an ideal case study of how a technology transfers system and infrastructure gradually takes shape in a developing country and is an excellent analysis if the Technology Transfer environment in SA prior to the coming in of the Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly Financed Research Bill.

The IP handbook editors which including Dr. Stan Kowalski (Director ITTI) point out that "Technology transfer offices (TTOs) are relatively new in South Africa. Indeed, not all universities even have explicit IP policies. Where policies are in place, these are not uniform across institutions. This can place them at a disadvantage when negotiating with the private sector, especially regarding the ownership of intellectual property funded by a company but developed by a university. An analysis of the current performance of TTOs reveals that the income accruing to universities from technology transfer activities is still insubstantial, that there is a time lag before a TTO can generate sufficient income to become self-supporting, and that the performance of TTOs at different institutions can vary widely. However, it must be remember that these results are similar to the experiences of TTOs in other countries (including developed countries)."

As per Rosemary "the chapter provides an analytical overview of technology transfer in South Africa. Technology transfer offices (TTOs) are relatively new in the country, and not all South African universities have explicit IP policies. The chapter discusses and analyzes the current performance of TTOs. Among other things, the results show that the income accruing to universities from technology transfer activities is not substantial, that there is a time lag before a TTO can generate sufficient income to become self-supporting, and that the performance of TTOs at different institutions varies widely. A history of public policy efforts to strengthen technology transfer in South Africa is provided, and the government's 2006 publication of the Framework for Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly Financed Research receives considerable analysis. Other measures being undertaken to support technology transfer are also discussed, as are the problems that such efforts still face."

The chapter is available online in the IP handbook site (www.iphandbook.org) and to continue reading the entire chapter click here.

The AIM Blog reports that "The Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) has become the fifth recipient of the Fifth City of Venice Award for Intellectual Property. At a ceremony in the Palazzo Ducale in St Mark's Squarelast night, AUTM vice-president Kevin Cullen, from the University of Glasgow, receive the award on behalf of the association from Paolo Baratta, the president of the Venice Biennale."

Founded in 1974 to promote university technology transfer in the United States and Canada AUTM has since become a global organisation and boasts over 3,000 members worldwide. In awarding the Premio Venezia tot he associaiton, te organisers noted its role in "having developed the role of industrial property rights in the economy, transforming them into tools contributing to the progress of society seen as a whole". The award comes at a time when criticism of the Bayh-Dole Act in the United States is growing more strident and will be a boost to AUTM and its members as they seek to counter these attacks.

To read the piece from AIM blog click here.